University of Nebraska Omaha
DigitalCommons@UNO
Special Education and Communication Disorders
Faculty Publications
Department of Special Education and
Communication Disorders
2009
Convergent Validity and Test-Retest Reliability of
the Preschool Behavioral and Emotional Behavior
Rating Scale: Parents as Respondents
Philip D. Nordness
University of Nebraska at Omaha, [email protected]
Michael H. Epstein
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected]
Lori Synhorst
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/spedfacpub
Part of the Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Commons
Recommended Citation
Nordness, Philip D.; Epstein, Michael H.; and Synhorst, Lori, "Convergent Validity and Test-Retest Reliability of the Preschool
Behavioral and Emotional Behavior Rating Scale: Parents as Respondents" (2009). Special Education and Communication Disorders
Faculty Publications. Paper 1.
http://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/spedfacpub/1
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department
of Special Education and Communication Disorders at
DigitalCommons@UNO. It has been accepted for inclusion in Special
Education and Communication Disorders Faculty Publications by an
authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UNO. For more
information, please contact [email protected].
PreBERS Parents
Running Head: PreBERS Parents as Respondents
Convergent Validity and Test-Retest Reliability of the Preschool Behavioral and
Emotional Behavior Rating Scale: Parents as Respondents
Philip D. Nordness
University of Nebraska-Omaha
Michael H. Epstein and Lori Synhorst
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
1
PreBERS Parents
2
Abstract
A number of professional organizations have called on the need for valid and reliable
assessments that measure young children’s strengths and competencies for the purpose of
making decisions about teaching and learning, identifying areas of lesser strength, and for
designing and evaluating interventions. The Preschool Behavioral and Emotional Rating
Scale (PreBERS; Epstein & Synhorst, in press) is a standardized test designed to assess
the emotional and behavioral strengths and competencies of children 3 to 5 years of age.
Two studies investigated the PreBERS with parents as the primary respondents. The first
study investigated the convergent validity of the PreBERS by comparing it to the
Caregiver-Teacher Report Form (C-TRF; Achenbach & Rescorla, 2000). Because the
PreBERS is a measure of emotional strengths and the C-TRF assesses problem behaviors,
moderate to very large negative correlations (-.370 to -.775) were reported between the
two measures. The second study investigated the test-retest reliability of the PreBERS
over a one-month period. All of the correlations were over .787 indicating that the
PreBERS is a stable measure across ratings. The results suggest that when parents are the
primary respondents, the PreBERS is a valid and reliable measure for assessing
emotional and behavioral strengths in preschool children.
PreBERS Parents
3
Convergent Validity and Test-Retest Reliability of the Preschool Behavioral and
Emotional Behavioral Rating Scale: Parents as Respondents
The 2004 amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
states that one way of enhancing the education of children with disabilities is by
strengthening the role and participation of parents and families in the assessment process
(Turnbull, Huerta, & Stowe, 2006). In fact, the current philosophy on best practices in
assessment indicates that questions about individual child functioning are best answered
through a process that allows for family input (Hall, 2005). Furthermore, IDEA requires
that parents and families be a part of any evaluation process that concerns their child and
that they are included as a member of the decision making team. Given that parents spend
the more time with their children than professionals, it stands to reason that they are more
knowledgeable about their child’s functioning and behavior. Thus, parents are an
excellent resource for providing useful information about the child’s development,
preferences, and social and emotional functioning (Lynch, 2005).
One approach to including parents in the assessment process is through the use of
rating scales. Rating scales serve a number of functions in the assessment process
including the gathering of baseline data and as a progress monitoring device for
measuring student outcomes during and after treatment. In addition, rating scales allow
multiple informants (e.g., parents, teachers) the opportunity to contribute information and
provide evaluation teams the chance to compare ratings across informants to identify
similarities and differences that may be relevant to identification and intervention
planning (Mooney, Epstein, Ryser, & Pierce, 2005). In response to the clear and
compelling recognized value of parent input in the assessment process, parent rating
PreBERS Parents
4
scales have become increasingly recognized as an important resource in assessing the
behavioral, social, and emotional strengths of young children (Merrill, 1999).
Historically, early childhood assessment has been conducted to identify deficits in
young children and then sort them into different categories of disability or pathology
(Meisels & Atkins-Burnett, 2000). While the assessment of deficits or challenges is often
critical in the identification of children who may require special assistance or services,
there is a potential problem that an over emphasis on deficits may ignore specific
strengths, competencies, skills, and resources that a young child may possess. In fact, the
particular set of skills and behaviors that a child possesses may be more important to
recognize than the amount of deficits or absence of ability (Meisels, 1994). Recognizing
and identifying the strengths and competencies within an individual is essential in
designing, implementing, and evaluating interventions for use with young children.
The increased recognition of the value of strength-based assessment has led to a
number of key recommendations from professional organizations. Specifically, in 2003
the Joint Position Statement of the National Association for the Education of Young
Children and the National Association of Early Childhood Specialists in the State
Departments of Education offered two key recommendations. First, all early childhood
programs should include parents in the assessment process. Second, valid and reliable
assessments that measure young children’s strengths and competencies should be
developed for the purpose of making sound decisions about teaching and learning,
identifying areas of concern, and for designing educational and developmental
interventions (National Association for the Education of Young Children, 2003). In
addition, the Zero to Three Working Group on Developmental Assessment recommended
PreBERS Parents
5
that the assessment process for infants and toddlers identify the child’s current
competencies and strengths as well as the competencies that will contribute to continued
developmental growth (Greenspan & Meisels, 1996). The increased emphasis on
strength-based assessment has led to the need for effective methods of identifying the
assets of children who are at-risk for learning and behavior problems in early childhood.
While many early childhood prevention and intervention programs were originally
designed to build on child and family strengths, they have frequently lacked
psychometrically sound instruments to identify and assess strengths in young children
(Raver & Zigler, 1997).
The Preschool Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale (PreBERS; Epstein &
Synhorst, in press) is a standardized test designed to assess the emotional and behavioral
strengths and competencies of children 3 to 5 years of age. The test has 42-items and is to
be completed by preschool teachers, parents, and other adults who are familiar with the
child. The subscales of the PreBERS were designed to assess four domains of emotional
and behavioral strengths in preschool children. The Emotional Regulation subscale
consists of 13 items that assess a child’s ability to interact with others in social situations
(e.g., “shares with others”, “accepts responsibility for own behavior”). The School
Readiness subscale consists of 13 items that assess a child’s behaviors that are associated
with being ready to learn in school (e.g., “pays attention to task”, “persists with tasks
until completed”). The Social Confidence subscale includes 9 items that assess a child’s
ability to understand his or her own functioning and relationships with others (e.g., “asks
for help”, “makes friends”). The Family Involvement subscale consists of 7 items that
measure a child’s relationship with their family (e.g., “interacts positively with siblings”,
PreBERS Parents
6
“maintains positive relations with family”). In these areas, adults who are familiar with
the child judge a series of statements on a Likert type scale (0=not at all like the child;
1=not much like the child; 2=like the child; 3=very much like the child). A total raw
score is determined for each subscale by adding the individual item scores. For each
subscale, raw scores are converted to standard scores with a mean of 10 and a standard
deviation of 3. An overall strength score is calculated by summing the standard scores of
the four subscales and converting that sum into a total strength standard score using the
table provided in the manual.
The content validity of the PreBERS was determined through a detailed
development process (Epstein & Synhorst, in press). First, a list of the original 52 items
from the original Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale (Epstein & Sharma, 1998;
Epstein, 2004), a strength based measure for students 6 to 18 years of age, was reviewed
by approximately 150 preschool professionals who were asked to judge the
appropriateness of each item for use with children three to five years of age. Based on the
feedback from these individuals, 21 items were eliminated for inclusion in the PreBERS.
Second, a comprehensive literature review of the research on social-emotional
development, childhood psychopathology, and risk and protective factors of children was
conducted. Several excellent sources provided relevant and detailed content (e.g.,
DelCarmen-Wiggins & Carter, 2004; National Research Council and Institute of
Medicine, 2000; Zero to Three, 2005). In addition, tests that were previously developed
to assess the emotional and behavioral problems and competencies of preschool children
were reviewed. For example, the items of the Behavioral Assessment System for Children
(Reynolds & Kamphus, 2004) and the Caregiver-Teacher Report Form (C-TRF,
PreBERS Parents
7
Achenbach & Rescorla, 2000) were reviewed for content, format, and wording. This
review led to the addition of 39 items to the PreBERS prototype. Then, a study was
conducted to determine if each individual item differentiated between children with and
without disabilities. Eight items did not discriminate the two groups and those items were
deleted from the prototype. Next, data on 239 preschool children who were developing
typically were collected from teachers who judged each student on the 62-item PreBERS.
The data were factor analyzed and 5 items were removed because they were either
redundant to other items or failed to meaningfully add to a factor (Epstein & Synhorst, in
press). Finally, data were collected on a nationally representative group of preschool
children (N=1,308) and used to standardize and norm the PreBERS (Epstein, Synhorst,
Cress, & Allen, in press). An exploratory factor analysis with a Promax solution
identified four factors. This analysis led to an additional 15 items being removed based
on redundancy, overlap with other items or failure to meaningfully contribute to a factor.
Thus, the comprehensive content validation process resulted in a 42 item, 4-factor test.
Reliability and Validity
A psychometrically sound instrument should be able to demonstrate scores to
support their validity across instruments and reliability over time in a consistent manner.
Validity refers to the appropriateness, meaningfulness and usefulness of what can be said
based on the scores obtained from a test (Mertens, 1998). Content validity measures the
extent to which a test’s items represent the construct to be measured (Salvia &
Ysseldyke, 2007). The content validity of the PreBERS was established during the multistep item development and norming processes described above. Discriminant validity
examines the extent to which an instrument can differentiate between constructs. The
PreBERS Parents
8
discriminant validity of the PreBERS was also established during the norming process
when the PreBERS scores of children with and without disabilities were compared
(Epstein & Synhorst, in press). As noted earlier, those findings identified 8 items that did
not differentiate the two samples and they were deleted from the original prototype of the
PreBERS. Another type of validity is convergent validity. Convergent validity refers to
the relationship between measures of the same construct using different assessment
measures (Crocker & Algina, 1986; Salvia & Ysseldyke, 2007). The greater the
relationship between the two tests, the stronger the convergent validity. While the
convergent validity of the PreBERS and the Caregiver-Teacher Report Form (C-TRF,
Achenbach & Rescorla, 2000) has been assessed with teachers (Epstein & Synhorst, in
press), it has not been investigated with both parents serving as the primary respondents.
Therefore, one purpose of the present study was to assess the convergent validity of the
PreBERS and the C-TRF with parents as the primary responders on both tools.
The concept of reliability refers to “the extent to which individual differences in
test scores are attributable to ‘true’ differences in the characteristics under consideration
and the extent to which they are attributable to chance error” (Anastasi and Urbina, 1977,
p. 84). The reliability of the PreBERS was established in several earlier studies (Epstein
& Synhorst, in press). Specifically, the internal consistency of the PreBERS was assessed
using the norming data where the Cronbach coefficient alphas for each of the subscales
and total strength scores were calculated separately by age (3, 4, and 5 year olds) and
gender (male and female). The coefficient alphas were found to be highly acceptable
(range .838 - .982). In addition to achieving acceptable internal reliability, an instrument
must demonstrate other forms of reliability. Inter-rater and short-term test-retest
PreBERS Parents
9
reliability (i.e., less than 1 month) were demonstrated in other studies (Epstein &
Synhorst, in press). In those studies, teachers or paraprofessionals completed the
PreBERS on preschool children. The correlations were over .80 demonstrating the test is
stable over a short time and is consistent between raters. However, the reliability of the
PreBERS using parents as responders has not been researched. Thus, the second purpose
of the present study was to assess the reliability of the PreBERS using parents as the
primary raters. Prior to the research, we received the approval of the Institutional Review
Board at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. IRB approved informed consent and
confidentiality procedures were followed in these studies.
Methods
Participants
Ninety-six preschool children and their parents participated in this study. The
participants were recruited from preschool classrooms located in a medium-sized city in
the Midwest. The children were recruited from preschool classes in eleven public schools
and two non-profit organizations serving working parents. Of the 96 preschoolers, 61
(63.5%) were male and 35 (36.5%) were female, and ranged in age between 3 and 6 years
of age (M=4.71, SD=.599). The ethnicity of the population was split between Caucasian
(85.4%), Hispanic/Latin American (1%), African American (3.1%), Asian (1%), Native
American (1%), multiracial (6.2%), and other (2.3%). All of the participants spoke
English as their primary language.
Measure
The convergent validity of the PreBERS was assessed by correlating the
PreBERS with the Caregiver-Teacher Report Form (C-TRF, Achenbach & Rescorla,
PreBERS Parents 10
2000). The C-TRF is a 100-item measure, and is completed by teachers or caregivers
familiar with the child. The C-TRF is used to assess problem behavior and yields a total
problem behavior score and internalizing and externalizing broadband behavior scores.
For this study, the Internalizing, Externalizing, and Total Problems scores of the C-TRF
were used for analysis. The C-TRF was chosen because of its extensive use as a measure
of behavior in preschool children and its sound psychometrics. The C-TRF has wellestablished levels of validity and reliability (Achenbach & Rescorla, 2000). Because the
PreBERS is a measurement of emotional strengths and the C-TRF assesses problem
behaviors, we would expect a negative correlation between the subscales of the
instruments. Therefore, we would expect a child who scores high on the PreBERS for
Emotional Regulation would likely score low on the C-TRF for Externalizing behavior.
As stated earlier, the PreBERS is a 42-item rating scale that assesses four areas of
emotional and behavioral strengths in preschool children. A parent or caregiver familiar
with the child rates each item on a Likert type scale (0=not much like the child to 3=very
much like the child). Standard scores are calculated for each subscale (M=10, SD=3) and
total strength score (M=100, SD=15).
Procedure
Approximately 50 preschool teachers attending a workshop on assessment of
children in early childhood special education programs were asked to participate. The
authors of the PreBERS conducted the workshop and solicited the teachers. From this
group, 13 preschool teachers agreed to assist and signed IRB approved consent forms.
Then, information packets were sent home to parents (N=132) of all of the preschool
children in the classes. The packet included an informational letter describing the purpose
PreBERS Parents 11
of the study, a consent form and a stamped, self-addressed envelope to be returned to the
researchers. Ninety-six parents (73% response rate) signed and returned consent forms
for their child to participate. Next, the parents were asked to complete the PreBERS and
the Caregiver-Teacher Report Form (Achenbach & Rescorla, 2000), according to the
instructions that appear in each test. First, they were mailed a packet containing
instructions on how to complete the ratings and a copy of each instrument. Each parent
was given two weeks to complete the ratings. Parents who did not return the tests within
that time period were given a reminder telephone call. Parent packets were returned on all
96 children. Second, two weeks after completing the first PreBERS form, parents were
mailed a second packet containing instructions and a PreBERS form to be completed.
Again, parents were given two weeks to complete the form and those who did not
received a reminder phone call. Packets were returned on 96 children with a mean
elapsed time between ratings of 37 days.
Results
Convergent Validity
Pearson correlation coefficients for each of the four subscales and Total Strength
score of the PreBERS and the Internalizing, Externaling and Total Problem Scores of the
C-TRF are presented in Table 1. Correlations across each of the scores were statistically
significant (p < .0001). The correlations ranged between -.370 and -.775. According to
Hopkins (2002), correlation coefficients between .30 and .50 are considered moderate,
between .50 and .70 are large and those between .70 and .90 are very large. All of the
correlation coefficients in this study ranged between ranged between moderate and very
large with a median correlation of -.616.
PreBERS Parents 12
For a correlation coefficient to be cited as evidence of validity it should meet or
exceed .35 in strength (Hammill, Brown, & Bryant,1989). All of the correlations across
the subscales exceeded this standard. As mentioned earlier, because the PreBERS is a
measurement of emotional strengths and the C-TRF assesses problem behaviors, all of
the correlations demonstrated negative relationships. It should be noted that the
correlations fell within a moderate to large range of scores (-.370 to -.775). This finding
was not surprising as externalizing and internalizing symptoms in young children are
often less distinct from each other, and may often tend to occur together (Merrell, 1999).
In fact, Achenbach and Rescorla (2000) noted that in preschool samples, children who
scored high in externalizing behavior problems were likely to score high on internalizing
problems as well.
Test Retest Reliability
The means and standard deviations for the reliability coefficients are reported in
Table 2. Pearson correlations are presented for each of the four subscales of the PreBERS
as well as the Total Strength Score. Correlations across each of the scores were
statistically significant (p < .0001) and ranged from a low of .787 for the Social
Confidence to .920 for the Total Strength Score. Eighty-five percent of the variance
between the two composite scores was potentially explained by the relationship.
According to Hopkins (2002), reliability coefficients between .70 and .90 are
considered very large. In the present study on the reliability of the PreBERS all of the
correlations were over .787. Very large test-retest reliability correlations across intervals
of about one month, such as in the present study, increase the confidence with which
practitioners may generalize the findings of one administration to another. The results
PreBERS Parents 13
from the present study suggest that the PreBERS is a relatively stable measure in the
short term for assessing the strengths of young children when parents are the primary
respondents. Assessments like the PreBERS, which may be used for screening,
identification and planning purposes, must be able to demonstrate stability over time if
those results are to assist in making meaningful decisions on how to enhance the
strengths of young children (Salvia & Ysseldyke, 2007).
Discussion
The findings from these two studies into the convergent validity and short-term
reliability of the Preschool Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale (Epstein & Synhorst,
in press) with parents serving as the primary respondents provides further evidence of the
psychometric status of the instrument for assessing the strengths of young children.
Given the increasing emphasis on including parents in the assessment process, the results
suggest that when parents are the primary respondents, the PreBERS is a valid and
reliable measure for assessing the strengths of young children. In regards to convergent
validity, all of the correlations with the C-TRF were statistically significant and exceeded
the .35 standard to support its validity in assessing what it purports to measure. In regards
to reliability, previous research on the PreBERS has supported its internal consistency,
inter-rater reliability and short-term test-retest reliability with teachers serving as the
primary raters. In this study, the short-term reliability of the PreBERS was assessed with
parents serving as the primary raters. All of the correlations were very large and
demonstrated significant stability over a period of one month. This suggests that parents
can accurately identify the emotional and behavioral strengths of preschool children and
that these strengths are consistent from one administration to another.
PreBERS Parents 14
An increasing number of professional organizations and public policy initiatives
have acknowledged the importance of strength-based assessment by calling for tests that
assess the competencies and strengths in young children. Strength-based assessment is an
integral part of the assessment process because it identifies the strengths and
competencies that can serve as the foundation for future growth and development and
lessen the influence of negative life experiences for the child (Rutter, 1985). Therefore,
the results from a strength-based instrument such as the PreBERS can be useful for
designing, implementing, and evaluating positive behavioral interventions and supports
for young children. In addition, the information derived from a strength-based assessment
can be used to assist in identifying goals and objectives for individualized child and
family services plan (IFSP) and/or an individual educational program (IEP) for the child.
In lieu of these applications, strength-based assessment is an ideal approach for
assessing young children who might be considered at-risk for emotional and behavioral
deficits. Factors that can put children at-risk for emotional and behavioral deficits can
include biological variables (e.g., attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD),
developmental delay) and environmental variables (e.g., poverty, abuse) that influence
child development. Therefore, strength-based assessment and the PreBERS would be
useful for programs that serve children who may evince one or more of these risk factors
such as early childhood special education programs and Head Start programs.
Limitations
There are several limitations to the findings that should be noted. First,
characteristics of the children sampled were not representative of the larger U.S.
preschool population. Specifically, young children from racial and ethnic minorities were
PreBERS Parents 15
underrepresented. Second, these studies were conducted in a mid-sized, mid-western
community. Therefore, it is possible that the findings will not generalize to parents and
children in other geographical regions. Third, the convergent validity of the PreBERS
was assessed with only a single instrument, namely the C-TRF. The degree of validity
may vary with other social adjustment measures for young children. Fourth, the study
used a convenience sample of parents who agreed to participate in this study and
therefore the nature of the sample may have influenced the results. For this reason, the
data do not represent the input of the parents who choose not to participate. Finally, while
previous research has established the ability of the PreBERS to discriminate between
children with and without disabilities (Epstein & Synhorst, in press), the sample in this
study included a broad range of children that did not include specific cases of children
with disabilities.
Future Research
Although a number of recent studies (e.g., Epstein & Synhorst, in press) have
examined the psychometric characteristics of the PreBERS, additional research is needed.
First, researchers should continue to examine the convergent validity of the PreBERS
with other behavioral assessments appropriate for primary age children and with parents
as the primary raters. For example, the convergent validity of the PreBERS chould be
examined with measures such as the Preschool and Kindergarten Behavior Scale
(Merrell, 2002) and the Minnesota Child Development Inventory (Ireton, 1992). In
addition, individual subscales of the PreBERS could be assessed with other specific
measures. For example, the School Readiness subscale could be contrasted with the
Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (Good & Kaminski, 2000), a test that
PreBERS Parents 16
measures emergent literacy skills. Second, while a number of studies have examined the
convergent validity of the PreBERS, research is needed on the predictive validity of the
measure. For instance, a child’s score on the School Readiness subscale could be
compared to their actual school performance at the conclusion of one or more years of
schooling to examine the predictive validity of the PreBERS. Third, additional research
is needed on the long-term reliability of the PreBERS with parents as the primary
respondent to examine how consistent the measure is over a long period of time. Finally,
researchers should continue to examine the psychometric characteristics with larger and
more diverse samples, including children from different cultural, racial, and economic
backgrounds as well as children with disabilities.
Clinical Implications
Measuring the emotional and behavioral strengths of young children is an
important part of the assessment process of gathering information about an individual in
order to make important decisions. With the support of additional research, the PreBERS
could potentially serve a number of uses for teachers, parents, and practitioners. First, the
PreBERS could potentially be used to identify children with limited strengths who might
be at-risk for school failure. As mentioned earlier, this would include children with a
variety of biological and environmental risk factors, but also children who display a
persistent pattern of externalizing or internalizing behaviors that impede their ability to
maintain developmentally appropriate social relationships, or their ability to participate in
organized activities in a socially appropriate manner. Second, the PreBERS can be
completed independently by parents and teachers to compare and contrast a child’s
emotional and behavioral strengths across home and school settings. This could help
PreBERS Parents 17
facilitate increased collaboration in the assessment process between parents and teachers
and lead to interventions that enhance social and emotional skills across settings. Third,
the PreBERS could be an excellent tool for developing strength-based goals and
interventions. For example, a preschooler who scores high on the Family Involvement
subscale, but low on the School Readiness subscale may benefit from an intervention that
incorporates the family as part of the treatment plan for improving school performance.
Such an intervention may include improving communication between the school and
parents with a “talk-book” that goes home with the child every night and details the
events of their day, or suggesting books or other school readiness materials that may
assist the parent and child in their pre-school and kindergarten preparation. Ideally, by
maximizing the family involvement strength, the staff may be able to enhance the child’s
school readiness. Finally, the PreBERS could be used as a pre and post test measure to
determine the effectiveness of an intervention on an individual child or group of students.
For example, to determine the effectiveness of a new schoolwide positive behavioral
support program, a principal could have parents and teachers complete the PreBERS on
all of the students at the beginning of the school year and at the completion of the school
year to determine the effectiveness of the program as a whole and on an individual basis.
PreBERS Parents 18
References
Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2000). Manual for the ASEBA Preschool Forms &
Profiles. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont Department of Psychiatry.
Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing (7th ed.). Upper Saddle, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. New
York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
DelCarmen-Wiggins, R., & Carter, A. (Eds.). (2004). Handbook of infant, toddler, and
preschool mental health assessment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Epstein, M. H., & Sharma, J. (1998). Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale: A
Strength-Based Approach to Assessment. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
Epstein, M. H., & Synhorst, L. (in press). Preschool Behavioral and Emotional Rating
Scale. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
Epstein, M. H., Synhorst, L., Cress, C. J, & Allen, E. (in press) Development and
standardization of a test to measure the emotional and behavioral strengths of
preschool children. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders.
Good, R., & Kaminski, R. (2000). Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills.
Loveland, CO: Sopris West.
Greenspan, S. I., & Meisels, S. J. (1996). Toward a new vision for the developmental
assessment of infants and young children. In S. J. Meisels & E. Fenichel (Eds.),
New visions for the developmental assessment of infants and young children (pp.
231-66). Washington, DC: ZERO TO THREE.
Hall, L. J. (2005). Early childhood assessment. McLoughlin, J. A. & Lewis, R. B., In
PreBERS Parents 19
Assessing students with special needs (6th ed.) (pp. 548-578). Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Hammill, D. D., Brown, L., & Bryant, R. R. (1989). A consumer’s guide to tests in print.
Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
Hopkins, W. G. (2002). A scale of magnitudes for effect statistics. In A new view of
statistics. Retrieved June 13, 2002, from
http://www.sportsci.org/resource/stats/effectmag.html
Ireton, H. (1992). The Child Development Inventory Manual. Minneapolis, MN:
Behavior Science Systems.
Lynch, E. W. (2005). Parent and family involvement. McLoughlin, J. A. & Lewis, R. B.,
In Assessing students with special needs (6th ed.) (pp. 530-547). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Meisels, S. J. (1994). Designing meaningful measurements for early childhood. In B. L.
Mallory & R. S. New (Eds.), Diversity in early childhood education: A call for
more inclusive theory, practice, and policy (pp. 205-25). New York: Teachers
College Press.
Meisels, S. J., & Atkins-Burnett, S. (2000). The elements of early childhood assessment.
In J. P. Shonkoff & S. J. Meisels (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood
intervention (pp. 231-257). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Merrell, K. W. (2002). Preschool and Kindergarten Behavior Scales (2nd edition).
Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
Merrell, K. W. (1999). Behavioral, social, and emotional assessment of children and
adolescents. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
PreBERS Parents 20
Mertens, D. M. (1998). Research methods in education and psychology: Integrating
diversity with quantitative and qualitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mooney, P., Epstein, M. H., Ryser, G., & Pierce, C. D. (2005). Reliability and validity of
the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale-Second Edition: Parent Rating Scale.
Children & Schools, 27, 147-155.
National Association for the Education of Young Children (2003, November). Early
Childhood Curriculum, Assessment, and Program Evaluation: Building an
effective, accountable system in programs for children birth through age 8.
Retrieved October 24, 2007, from http://www.naeyc.org/about/positions/cape.asp
Raver, C. C., & Zigler, E. F. (1997). Social competence: An untapped dimension in
evaluating Head Start’s success. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 363385.
Rutter, M. (1987). Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms. American Journal
of Orthopsychiatry, 57, 316-331.
Salvia, J., & Ysseldyke, J. (2007). Assessment (10th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Turnbull, R., Huerta, N., & Stowe, M., (2006). The Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act as amended in 2004. Upper Saddle Creek: Pearson Education
Zero To Three (2005). Diagnostic classification of mental health and developmental
disorders in infancy and early childhood (rev. ed.). Washington, DC: Zero to
Three Press.
PreBERS Parents 21
Table 1
Correlation Coefficients Between Subscales for the PreBERS and the Caregiver – TRF
with Parents as Responders
Subscale
Internalizing
Externalizing
Total Problem
Emotional Regulation
-.617
-.775
-.738
School Readiness
-.536
-.574
-.616
Social Confidence
-.444
-.370
-.432
Family Involvement
-.548
-.668
-.672
Total Strength Score
-.615
-.689
-.705
Note. All were statistically significant at the p < .0001 level.
PreBERS Parents 22
Table 2
Test-Retest Reliability of the PreBERS with Parents as Responders
First Testing
Second Testing
M
SD
M
SD
Emotional
Regulation
9.00
2.356
9.09
2.280
.877
.769
School
Readiness
9.13
2.558
9.21
2.731
.883
.779
Social
Confidence
10.22 2.258
10.28 2.434
.787
.619
Family
Involvement
9.87
9.95
.793
.629
Total Strength
Score
97.18 12.769
.920
.846
2.273
2.292
97.38 13.236
R
Adjusted R
Square (%
Variance)
Note. All of the correlations were statistically significant at the p < .0001 level.